Re: Turn on the lights

Mark Brader:
But I'm saying that the fact that you turned something to turn it
off, or up, was simply a coincidence, because people were turning
things into other states even earlier.

Evan Kirshenbaum:
I see your point. However, I'll counter by saying that from the
1880s, I also see electrical equipment being "switched on", which
would seem to put the focus on the mechanism. I don't see why
you'd look for one explanation with "switch" and another with
"turn".

Mark Brader:
Explanation of what? There is nothing to explain.

Okay, maybe "switch on" needs explaining, and in that case, I can
explain it by saying that it was modeled after "turn on".

Evan Kirshenbaum:
That would have been my guess: "Normally, we'd have said 'turn on',
but unlike with water, gas, and steam, we're not turning anything,
we're throwing a switch, so we'll say 'switch on'".

No, that's not what I meant. I meant: "Hey, we have this new meaning
of 'switch' to mean an electrical device; let's verb it too. Look how
we can use 'turn' with a direct object and an adjectival complement,
'turn on the light' or 'turn the light on'; let's use 'switch' the
same way and say 'switch on the light.'"


I'll also note that Robert Hunter's contemporaneous 1888
_Encyclopædic Dictionary_ defines "turn on" as

To open a passage to, or admit, as a fluid, by means of a
stop-*** or valve, so as to allow to do the required work, or
have the desired effect...

So perhaps the analogy is closer to that of water than gas
lighting.

This is not a phrasal verb and there is no analogy.

You've said this a couple of times, and I'm going to have to ask you
what you mean by it. Without begging the question, why isn't it a
phrasal verb?

Phrasal verbs are formed from a verb and a particle that could be
considered a preposition or adverb, and they convey a meaning not
analyzable by considering the two parts alone. "Turn on" is a
combination of a verb with an adjective, and any other adjective
that makes sense could be substituted. As well as turning a light
on, you can turn it green (if "light" means an assembly like a railway
signal or traffic light) or turn it brighter (if it's on a dimmer).

It is true that if you move "on" before "the light", as in "turn on
the light", you then can't substitute other adjectives so freely.
So perhaps "turn on" is a phrasal verb here after all, but if it is
one, then "turn on the light" is derived from "turn the light on",
referring to state changed, and does not require any further explanation.

And are you arguing with nineteenth-century dictionary
writers who say that "turn on" meant physical motion when it came to
mechanisms for which the motive power was admitted by a stop-*** or
do you accept that they "turned on" the gas, water, and steam (and
things powered by gas, water, and steam) because they turned things
but that they "turned on" electric lights (and machinery) for a
different reason (even though they often turned things to do so)?

That's quite a mouthful to agree or disagree with. In brief, I never
said that physical motion was not involved; only that the fact that
this motion might be turning in the sense of rotation is a coincidence.
Again, note that the term was used for sluice gates as well as
stop-cocks, and that "turn" for a state change is ~800 years old.
--
Mark Brader "... Dennis Ritchie and Brian Kernighan
Toronto are Dennis Ritchie and Brian Kernighan,
msb@xxxxxxx and I am not." -- Steve Summit

My text in this article is in the public domain.
.

Loading